George v. Chesapeake and Ohio Railway Co.
United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia
348 F. Supp. 283 (1972)
- Written by Jenny Perry, JD
Facts
Luther Earl George (plaintiff) was a tugboat pilot and had been in the employ of the Chesapeake and Ohio Railway Company (company) (defendant) for 48 years. George worked 12-hour shifts and was paid hourly. George’s time off was his own, and George could accept or decline extra duty during his time off. For 15 years, George had been afflicted with recurrent mouth and gum sores that he treated himself at home and on board ship. In 1967, George developed a sore that did not respond to his usual treatment. A private specialist diagnosed George with cancer, which George reported to the company’s boat master as required by company policy. George then saw a company doctor, who confirmed the diagnosis and gave George the option of radiation treatment or surgery by a general surgeon at the railway employees’ hospital. George opted to try radiation first. The radiation treatments were not available at the railway employees’ hospital, so the company paid for a series of treatments at a private hospital. After a period of remission, George developed another tumor and had surgery at a private hospital because his doctor recommended that the procedure be performed by a specialist that the railway employees’ hospital could not provide. The company declined to pay for the procedure on the grounds that it could have been performed at a marine hospital where the company would have covered the cost, although no one at the company had informed George of that fact. George sued the company for failure to pay maintenance and cure under general maritime law.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Hoffman, C.J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 832,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,500 briefs, keyed to 994 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.